EVE Search - Mini PVP mission - Your Input Requested.

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Mini PVP mission - Your Input Requested.

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
MNagy Yo-Mama Quixotic Hegemony 32	Posted - 2011.11.18 20:53:00 - [1] - Quote Most level 4 mission runners would tell you that their missions are predictable. Every level 4 mission has a certain ship that is either a) a trigger b) a scramming ship c) the mission completion ship d)... so on. Here is the idea for a new pvp mission type: Imagin you get a mission from your level 4 agents (mini PVP). This mission would give you 2 primary restrictions... 1. Ship class type. These missions would make you HAVE TO use (for example) a frigate ship. 2. Would be a 'Timed' mission (I'll explain this shortly)... These type of missions would only ever make you REQUIRE to use a small ship such as a Frigate or a Destroyer. (The Cheap little ships we used when we first started and thought the game was really exciting). The mission would give you a "keycard" for your jumpgate. (explained below). Now, you go to your agent and they offer up this mission. You accept. It gives you a keycard for activating a warp gate for co-ordinates of a 1.0 or a 0.9 SOL near you. So you get your frigate ship all pvp'd up and fly to the system. Now, someone else is getting missions from their agent and they are offered up a mini pvp mission (Frigate Ship Class) type and they accept it. Upon acceptance both parties missions are now linked up.... and both parties get a notification email saying they have 15 minutes to get to the beacon. When the missioners fly up to the warp gate and "Jump", the jumpgate hurles them to the beacon (within about 30km random). That way whoever gets there first isnt 0 meters away from them. Since the Jumpgate requires your keycard, nobody else can come and remote rep or anything. It's a pure 1 vs 1 battle. The 2 missioners fight to the death. SHIP ONLY. NO PODDING. If you pod, that is why the mission is in a 1.0 or 0.9 system. Your standing will take a massive hit and also regular pirates in the game would not be able to sneak into these systems to do combat as concord would catch them. As soon as one of the missioners ships blow up both parties get a SUCCESSFUL mission. Since a ship at anytime can warp off during a mission - you better fit a warp scrambler on your ship - otherwise they can go repair and come back. Since the mission chose the Ship Class - you choose the fit. If you want to T1 fit it, T2, or Faction fit it. Go ahead. Fit it to what you think you will have fun with. it's your dime. If you want to come with a T2 version of the small (Frigate) for example - again - go ahead... its ur dime. To fit a ship like this is so cheap, the mission being worth 5mill in isk + LP is most likely plenty. But the payout would be based on a T1 version. Since both parties get a "Successful Mission", the winner of the battle gets technically your Loot and a killmail. Why the timer? (I mentioned above)... Lets say you accept a mini pvp mission and nobody else is mission running or nobody else accepts that mission. The mission would give you a "Successful Mission" if in 15 minutes no opponent could be found. When both parites do accept and only 1 shows up (flys thru the gate)... the other gets a failed mission in the aloted 15 min and you get a successful one. When in this special pvp room that you can only get to with the gate, fleet bonus's do not work. That way its a fair 1 vs 1 battle. If thes missions are popular among mission runners - later ccp can add some more variety such as mini 2vs2 mission and stuff. (lets start off small first). 1. Players get to experience pvp in a somewhat safe environment. This may actually give some players some experience and later they may be inclined to go to Lowsec or Null to check it out. 2. Since fitting these tiny beginner ships cost virtually nothing to a Level 4 mission runner, I am assuming any mission runner would happily accept this expense. I know I would. 3. Sometimes even I am looking for some quick pvp battle (cause I only have about 30 min to an hour to play ) and roam through ls or even gatecamp and wait for someone to jump through. I would rather accept a mini pvp mission KNOWING I would have fun in the small amount of time I have to play even if I lose my tiny built ship. 4. You get to battle your same class of ship type but not necessarily the same races ship type. Whatever the other guy fits for battle is fair game. You get a neat little experience and also the knowledge of how to properly keep fitting a better pvp ship without the worry of being podded. (The worry is still there but i'd accept this risk). 5. If a mission runner doesnt want to run this type of mission - they can decline it just like the rest of them. So the quetions are: 1. Any constructive input you have? 2. You as a mission runner - would you like / or accept these types of mission too? Cheers' M.
Dunkler Imperator N.F.H.P. Eternal Evocations 5	Posted - 2011.11.18 20:57:00 - [2] - Quote Why? Just go to low-sec Or Null Or WH OR wardec some1 Lot's of ways to pvp Without wasting dev time.
MNagy Yo-Mama Quixotic Hegemony 32	Posted - 2011.11.18 21:03:00 - [3] - Quote Dunkler Imperator wrote: Why? Just go to low-sec Or Null Or WH OR wardec some1 Lot's of ways to pvp Without wasting dev time. Because if your life becomes as busy as mine does and you want some 'quick pvp'... I do not have many options. I can fly to low sec only to get into a 5-1 battle and perhaps be podded. This way I can have a quick pvp battle - a bit safer because of the podding in hs and log off eve and go do real life stuff. The only alternative is to do stagnant missions, or not even log off and let my account expire till I actaully have time to play. My solution brings pvp to HS people.... that one day will want to go to LS and pvp or even Null... and brings a fair battle to test out fits against total strangers. LS you also lose standings... Not everyone has time everyday to LS roam for hours.
Dunkler Imperator N.F.H.P. Eternal Evocations 5	Posted - 2011.11.18 22:44:00 - [4] - Quote try the test server then. Risk free Quick pvp.
SilentSkills Estrale Frontiers Project Wildfire 45	Posted - 2011.11.18 22:50:00 - [5] - Quote too much work for a very select, and small group of players. Plus all the above posters have said
Vincent Athena V.I.C.E. The Lostboys 161	Posted - 2011.11.18 22:56:00 - [6] - Quote Ive always thought there should be more ways to get pvp in whats supposed to be a pvp game. This sort of battle arena would be one way. Also,video of the combat site could be broadcast , and people could be given the opportunity to watch to bet on the outcome of battles. Might even be worthwhile Incarna content for establishments; you go to a bar, sit with friends or enemies, and bet on the fights. I think the main negative with ideas like this is it might not increase PvP, just move it from the unpredictable realm of low and null into these arenas. The result would be even less action in low and null. CCP employees should never proclaim a feature to be awesome. Only subscribers should. Subscribers can never answer a question posed to CCP. Only CCP can.
ACE McFACE Acetech Systems 94	Posted - 2011.11.19 01:10:00 - [7] - Quote Here is my input, post ideas in Features and Ideas not General Discussion Real men wear goggles and a Navy shirt!
Harlot Hohannson Eye on Wang Poo 5	Posted - 2011.11.19 01:14:00 - [8] - Quote Thats the most long winded "I want instanced PVP fights and complete immunity from risk" post I have ever read. Congratulations I guess? It's still a dumb idea and would discourage genuine PVP, particularly solo with is already a dying art.
Mrs Sooperdudespaceman Loud On The Forums Silent In Game 12	Posted - 2011.11.19 01:34:00 - [9] - Quote Just get your own neutral booster alt and RR alt if you want to solo.
MeestaPenni Mercantile and Stuff 74	Posted - 2011.11.19 01:37:00 - [10] - Quote Harlot Hohannson wrote: would discourage genuine PVP, particularly solo. Wut? Did you read it?

mkint 368	Posted - 2011.11.19 01:38:00 - [11] - Quote 1) this is the wrong sub forum. 2) people saying it stops regular pvp are being reactionary. The group who would use such mechanics are people who are not nor ever will be pvp targets otherwise. And if it does cut back the non existant solo pvpers that you want to gank with your sc blobs doesn't that suggest something is fundamentally wrong with the games pvp as is? I would modify your rules though. Probably stricter fitting requirements but only the winner gets paid. Maybe environmental effects to keep things fresh.
MNagy Yo-Mama Quixotic Hegemony 32	Posted - 2011.11.19 02:19:00 - [12] - Quote mkint wrote: 1) this is the wrong sub forum. 2) people saying it stops regular pvp are being reactionary. The group who would use such mechanics are people who are not nor ever will be pvp targets otherwise. And if it does cut back the non existant solo pvpers that you want to gank with your sc blobs doesn't that suggest something is fundamentally wrong with the games pvp as is? I would modify your rules though. Probably stricter fitting requirements but only the winner gets paid. Maybe environmental effects to keep things fresh. My only reasoning that the loser had a successful missoin ( yes - maybe not get paid ) but a successful mission was so that the pvp was attempted, and because the age of the toon technically doesnt matter. So even though a 2007 player will smoke a 2011 player, at least both had fun, and the 2011 player got some action on how things can go horribly wrong.
Large Collidable Object morons. 591	Posted - 2011.11.19 02:27:00 - [13] - Quote As written in the OP, I wouldn't support it - would be nice if incorpaorated into the tutorial missions, but I doubt there would be enough people doing those at any given time so matching them would be an issue. morons- sting like a butterfly and-ápost like a bee.
mkint 368	Posted - 2011.11.19 03:10:00 - [14] - Quote Large Collidable Object wrote: As written in the OP, I wouldn't support it - would be nice if incorpaorated into the tutorial missions, but I doubt there would be enough people doing those at any given time so matching them would be an issue. I disagree. Mission hub systems are plenty busy when eve is not dying. If the mission paid enough people would give it a shot. His suggestion limits exploiting as well. There probably could do with some adjusting of mission denial rules as well. The system could be enhanced by objectives like using a hacking module or something. It would be hilarious if these highsec missions got tied to sov somehow and nullbears paid the reward or suffered.
Alara IonStorm RvB - BLUE Republic 439	Posted - 2011.11.19 03:26:00 - [15] - Quote Harlot Hohannson wrote: instanced That word does not mean what you think it means. @OP I like the general idea but a Group option like AT would be cool as well. I like the idea of PvP w / o needing Warp Disruption Mods making an entirely new set of fits viable for this. Overall a fun idea for casuals.
FeralShadow Black Storm Cartel 18	Posted - 2011.11.19 03:38:00 - [16] - Quote As someone who doesn't run missions, I think this would be a great way to get people to get valuable pvp experience. They may be too nervous or simply haven't tried it, but it'd be a great way while keeping risk low and giving out some reward even to the losers. The goal here, guys, is to bring pvp to people who would not usually participate. Every pilot who then decides that they like pvp and want to participate will make everybody else's experience that much richer.
ASadOldGit School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 17	Posted - 2011.11.19 04:21:00 - [17] - Quote FeralShadow wrote: As someone who doesn't run missions, I think this would be a great way to get people to get valuable pvp experience. They may be too nervous or simply haven't tried it, but it'd be a great way while keeping risk low and giving out some reward even to the losers. The goal here, guys, is to bring pvp to people who would not usually participate. Every pilot who then decides that they like pvp and want to participate will make everybody else's experience that much richer. Exactly. I would like to do something like the Agony PvP class, but it means moving to a distant location, and working to someone else's schedule. I also don't have access to a corp for 1 on 1 training (yet). My play-time during the week is 1 hour before downtime, and then it's bedtime - I don't have a lot of options. If there was a "training ground" of sorts, that I could drop into whenever I wanted, I'd be more inclined to do so. To those who are against the idea, if the first few experiences at PvP result in the new guy being swamped by 10-20 dickheads, they're just going to stay in high-sec and do their own thing. Oh wait, they already do! My container is NOT imploding! It's just a bit upset that it only sees cheap crap.
ASadOldGit School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 17	Posted - 2011.11.19 04:26:00 - [18] - Quote MNagy wrote: My solution brings pvp to HS people.... that one day will want to go to LS and pvp or even Null... and brings a fair battle to test out fits against total strangers. I suppose to prevent abuse, you could limit the number of missions they could do to 100-200 or so - just enough to get them hooked on PvP and seek out low/nullsec. My container is NOT imploding! It's just a bit upset that it only sees cheap crap.
Morganta Peripheral Madness The Midget Mafia 345	Posted - 2011.11.19 04:33:00 - [19] - Quote gank missions you get routed by your agent to a "rogue pod pilot" vandalizing local asteroids The American public's reaction to the change was poor and the new cola was a major marketing failure. The subsequent reintroduction of Coke's original formula, re-branded as "Coca-Cola Classic", resulted in a significant gain in sales, leading to speculation that the introduction of the New Coke formula was just a marketing ploy
Daneirkus Auralex The Foreign Legion Test Alliance Please Ignore 4	Posted - 2011.11.19 05:35:00 - [20] - Quote i actually like this idea.

MNagy Yo-Mama Quixotic Hegemony 32	Posted - 2011.11.19 05:37:00 - [21] - Quote ASadOldGit wrote: MNagy wrote: My solution brings pvp to HS people.... that one day will want to go to LS and pvp or even Null... and brings a fair battle to test out fits against total strangers. I suppose to prevent abuse, you could limit the number of missions they could do to 100-200 or so - just enough to get them hooked on PvP and seek out low/nullsec. Why limit this kind of mission...? The mission would technically pay less than the cost of a "Rifter". Any level 4 pays out easily 5-20 mil. ( Bounties + Loot + LP ) If I have an expense of 5-10 million here and there to have a fair pvp fight for a mission "success" + 0 isk + 1 lp. I would still accept this type of mission. Its not about the ISK or the LP. I wouldn't even care that if the timer expired and nobody accepted the mission on the other end the mission got automatically canceled. Its about getting to pew pew someone fairly without getting swapmed and overloaded. Not about the isk. I have enough isk in this game that mission running is getting stale. Don't tell me that your version of PVP always means to sit a gate and catch whatever ship trying to go through ( that is not pvp fit ). Or Someone is in a PVE fit running a mission in LS and gets jumped by a couple PVP fit ships. Yes that is Technically PVP - Player vs Player, but in this case since both ships ARE actually PVP fit, there is a bit more fun factor.
Rassad Interstellar eXodus BricK sQuAD. 2	Posted - 2011.11.19 06:28:00 - [22] - Quote Why limit it to a random level 4 agent mission? People might want to JUST do pvp missions, why not add a pvp agent, for pvp missions why limit it to an arena? wait nevermind................................ Just fix FW.
mkint 369	Posted - 2011.11.19 06:47:00 - [23] - Quote Rassad wrote: Why limit it to a random level 4 agent mission? People might want to JUST do pvp missions, why not add a pvp agent, for pvp missions why limit it to an arena? wait nevermind................................ Just fix FW. One off duels would mean they aren't easily abused. also opens room for interesting double crosses. The big downside I can see is mismatched levels of competency for really unfair fights. It takes quite a few tries to really learn how to frig duel well.
Herzog Wolfhammer Sigma Special Tactics Group 187	Posted - 2011.11.19 06:58:00 - [24] - Quote Harlot Hohannson wrote: Thats the most long winded "I want instanced PVP fights and complete immunity from risk" post I have ever read. Congratulations I guess? It's still a dumb idea and would discourage genuine PVP, particularly solo with is already a dying art. Probably hard to implement too. However I always wondered if it would be interesting if NPCs started giving high payout "kill missions" where the target is other players with really bad standings - either criminals are against corps - such as I have with Serpentis (like -9.9 or something I don't remember). Imagine pirate factions giving out kill missions for players who simply have bad standings against the pirates for ratting them so much? Don't know what that would imply in the long run, just seems "EvE-ish" and somewhat cool for that to happen.
Rassad Interstellar eXodus BricK sQuAD. 2	Posted - 2011.11.19 07:01:00 - [25] - Quote Herzog Wolfhammer wrote: Harlot Hohannson wrote: Thats the most long winded "I want instanced PVP fights and complete immunity from risk" post I have ever read. Congratulations I guess? It's still a dumb idea and would discourage genuine PVP, particularly solo with is already a dying art. Probably hard to implement too. However I always wondered if it would be interesting if NPCs started giving high payout "kill missions" where the target is other players with really bad standings - either criminals are against corps - such as I have with Serpentis (like -9.9 or something I don't remember). Imagine pirate factions giving out kill missions for players who simply have bad standings against the pirates for ratting them so much? Don't know what that would imply in the long run, just seems "EvE-ish" and somewhat cool for that to happen. Just Fix Faction Warfare?
mkint 369	Posted - 2011.11.19 07:07:00 - [26] - Quote Herzog Wolfhammer wrote: Harlot Hohannson wrote: Thats the most long winded "I want instanced PVP fights and complete immunity from risk" post I have ever read. Congratulations I guess? It's still a dumb idea and would discourage genuine PVP, particularly solo with is already a dying art. Probably hard to implement too. However I always wondered if it would be interesting if NPCs started giving high payout "kill missions" where the target is other players with really bad standings - either criminals are against corps - such as I have with Serpentis (like -9.9 or something I don't remember). Imagine pirate factions giving out kill missions for players who simply have bad standings against the pirates for ratting them so much? Don't know what that would imply in the long run, just seems "EvE-ish" and somewhat cool for that to happen. That really would be loads of fun. One inherent problem though. They would have to track activity levels of every player and what areas of space people live in. It would suck to get a kill mission on someone who only ever logs in to change skills and is docked in a null outpost.
mkint 369	Posted - 2011.11.19 07:10:00 - [27] - Quote Rassad wrote: Herzog Wolfhammer wrote: Harlot Hohannson wrote: Thats the most long winded "I want instanced PVP fights and complete immunity from risk" post I have ever read. Congratulations I guess? It's still a dumb idea and would discourage genuine PVP, particularly solo with is already a dying art. Probably hard to implement too. However I always wondered if it would be interesting if NPCs started giving high payout "kill missions" where the target is other players with really bad standings - either criminals are against corps - such as I have with Serpentis (like -9.9 or something I don't remember). Imagine pirate factions giving out kill missions for players who simply have bad standings against the pirates for ratting them so much? Don't know what that would imply in the long run, just seems "EvE-ish" and somewhat cool for that to happen. Just Fix Faction Warfare? Even if fw was fixed it would still only appeal to certain people. Spreading the pvp around, breaking the traditional careers but in a good way would only make the game better.
Alara IonStorm RvB - BLUE Republic 439	Posted - 2011.11.19 07:21:00 - [28] - Quote mkint wrote: Even if fw was fixed it would still only appeal to certain people. Spreading the pvp around, breaking the traditional careers but in a good way would only make the game better. This, do join RvB I had to leave a Corp I liked, same if I chose FW or Piracy, or Merc Work. Usually when there is plenty of PvP instead of a PvP OP once or twice a week the Corp is centered around it. There is little anytime PvP without committing yourself to it as your primary play style.
Lexmana Imperial Stout 57	Posted - 2011.11.19 07:37:00 - [29] - Quote Part of reason EVE is such an awsome game is that it takes time and effort to get what you want and that every action has a consequence. This idea goes against it. There are plenty of instant gratification and risk free PvP games out there. EVE should not be another.
Alara IonStorm RvB - BLUE Republic 439	Posted - 2011.11.19 07:45:00 - [30] - Quote Lexmana wrote: Part of reason EVE is such an awsome game is that it takes time and effort to get what you want and that every action has a consequence. This idea goes against it. There are plenty of instant gratification and risk free PvP games out there. EVE should not be another. EVE would still not be one of them. Because you would never use this feature. I would however and would enjoy it because I like the fights more then the hunt and often just plain do not have time for the hunt. And no it does not take time or effort to get things in EVE, most things can be acquired quick, as for consequence, ship loss is the consequence. I don't want it so you don't get it is not a good argument.

mkint 369	Posted - 2011.11.19 07:47:00 - [31] - Quote Lexmana wrote: Part of reason EVE is such an awsome game is that it takes time and effort to get what you want and that every action has a consequence. This idea goes against it. There are plenty of instant gratification and risk free PvP games out there. EVE should not be another. Are you saying it should be impossible to achieve any pvp goals in a short session? That part time players should only be allowed pve?
Tannis Maya 7th Interval 0	Posted - 2011.11.19 11:10:00 - [32] - Quote I like it. It doesn't take anything away from any other part of the game, it helps people learn that losing ships isn't the end of the world and I think it might even encourage people to indulge in more solo PvP outside of this mechanic.
RubyPorto Profoundly Disturbed RED.Legion 11	Posted - 2011.11.19 11:14:00 - [33] - Quote MNagy wrote: Because if your life becomes as busy as mine does and you want some 'quick pvp'... I do not have many options. Join RvB /thread
Tannis Maya 7th Interval 0	Posted - 2011.11.19 11:26:00 - [34] - Quote RubyPorto wrote: MNagy wrote: Because if your life becomes as busy as mine does and you want some 'quick pvp'... I do not have many options. Join RvB /thread So leave your corp and move to the other side of the universe?
Lexmana Imperial Stout 58	Posted - 2011.11.19 11:32:00 - [35] - Quote Alara IonStorm wrote: I don't want it so you don't get it is not a good argument. Fair point. But. It would change the way EVE is played by a lot of players and it would attract a new group of players to EVE. Now that is not necessary a bad thing if it wasn't for the fact that this new group of players will demand even more instant gratification and less consequences. EVE will gravitate towards the masses instead of providing a unique experience. Maybe that is what you want?
Sader Rykane The Dark Space Initiative Revival Of The Talocan Empire 134	Posted - 2011.11.19 11:33:00 - [36] - Quote http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1483760 Relevant.
Large Collidable Object morons. 593	Posted - 2011.11.19 11:38:00 - [37] - Quote mkint wrote: Large Collidable Object wrote: As written in the OP, I wouldn't support it - would be nice if incorpaorated into the tutorial missions, but I doubt there would be enough people doing those at any given time so matching them would be an issue. I disagree. Mission hub systems are plenty busy when eve is not dying. If the mission paid enough people would give it a shot. His suggestion limits exploiting as well. There probably could do with some adjusting of mission denial rules as well. The system could be enhanced by objectives like using a hacking module or something. It would be hilarious if these highsec missions got tied to sov somehow and nullbears paid the reward or suffered. I think you misunderstood my point - what I meant was that I'd like to see it incorporated into tutorial missions. So only one time, only for noobs (assuming a vet creating a noob alt doesn't go through the tutorial) - hence finding enough available opponents within a reasonable timeframe would be an issue. It would bring noobs closer to the concept of pvp and provide for some interaction between them. As some kind of instanced arena-matching service for bored missionbears, I absolutely loathe the idea. morons- sting like a butterfly and-ápost like a bee.
Wyke Mossari Staner Industries 22	Posted - 2011.11.19 11:41:00 - [38] - Quote This is similar to how I expected FW to turn out and I think there is merit in the concept but it need to have the mechanics though out. Make them FW missions. Drop the high-sec provision, send to contested FW systems. Have the result influence the sovereignty mechanic. Post as a proposal in the assembly hall for discussion.
Lexmana Imperial Stout 58	Posted - 2011.11.19 11:47:00 - [39] - Quote Wyke Mossari wrote: This is similar to how I expected FW to turn out and I think there is merit in the concept but it need to have the mechanics though out. Make them FW missions. Drop the high-sec provision, send to contested FW systems. Have the result influence the sovereignty mechanic. Post as a proposal in the assembly hall for discussion. This is much better than OP for so many reasons.
Large Collidable Object morons. 593	Posted - 2011.11.19 11:59:00 - [40] - Quote Herzog Wolfhammer wrote: However I always wondered if it would be interesting if NPCs started giving high payout "kill missions" where the target is other players with really bad standings - either criminals are against corps - such as I have with Serpentis (like -9.9 or something I don't remember). Imagine pirate factions giving out kill missions for players who simply have bad standings against the pirates for ratting them so much? Lol - I actually love this idea - approach a Gurista agent in 0.0, get killrights on a random guy with bad guristas standings (don't notify him he became a target - otherwise he wont log in until the mission expired), pop a Tengu/Golem in highsec. Rinse, repeat... Somehow I doubt it's going to happen though... morons- sting like a butterfly and-ápost like a bee.

Alara IonStorm RvB - BLUE Republic 439	Posted - 2011.11.19 12:17:00 - [41] - Quote Lexmana wrote: Fair point. But. It would change the way EVE is played by a lot of players and it would attract a new group of players to EVE. Now that is not necessary a bad thing if it wasn't for the fact that this new group of players will demand even more instant gratification and less consequences. EVE will gravitate towards the masses instead of providing a unique experience. Yes it would, people who would enjoy this content would have fun. So what if they add instant gratification content that is suited towards Casuals. People conquering Null Sec, Pirating in Low Sec, Trading / Scamming and Roaming Wormholes will still have all that but if they can provide fun quicker to those who just want to log on and play all the power to them. Large Collidable Object wrote: As some kind of instanced arena-matching service for bored missionbears, I absolutely loathe the idea. Why does this word keep coming up. The OP didn't prepose Instancing nor anyone else in the thread. That is twice now =/ As for PvP for bored Mission Bears why not. It won't hurt what you do in game but will provide casual fun for everyone else.
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai 88	Posted - 2011.11.19 12:19:00 - [42] - Quote MNagy wrote: (PvP agents suggestion). I already suggested that some weeks ago: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=297847#post297847 So... no affordable NEx store... no full-fledged Incarna... no new casual content... no new solo content... no new PvE content...-á Why should I keep paying to play this game?
Alara IonStorm RvB - BLUE Republic 439	Posted - 2011.11.19 12:22:00 - [43] - Quote Tannis Maya wrote: RubyPorto wrote: Join RvB /thread So leave your corp and move to the other side of the universe? Did that, miss my old Corp. =( Sader Rykane wrote: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1483760 Relevant. Luv that thread.
Large Collidable Object morons. 593	Posted - 2011.11.19 12:54:00 - [44] - Quote Alara IonStorm wrote: As some kind of instanced arena-matching service for bored missionbears, I absolutely loathe the idea. Quote: Why does this word keep coming up. The OP didn't prepose Instancing nor anyone else in the thread. That is twice now =/ MNagy wrote: The mission would give you a "keycard" for your jumpgate. (explained below). [...] Since the Jumpgate requires your keycard, nobody else can come and remote rep or anything. [...] When in this special pvp room that you can only get to with the gate, fleet bonus's do not work He didn't say the word 'instance', yet that's pretty much the closest thing to an instanced pvp arena imaginable. Quote: As for PvP for bored Mission Bears why not. It won't hurt what you do in game but will provide casual fun for everyone else. It shouldn't provide any payout - LP or isk or standing-wise - that's just too much special treatment. Which leaves the question why they don't hook up with some corpmates and drop some cans, organise corp tournaments etc... This 'instant gratification' mentality is disgusting and against the spirit of the game. morons- sting like a butterfly and-ápost like a bee.
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai 88	Posted - 2011.11.19 13:19:00 - [45] - Quote Large Collidable Object wrote: (...) This 'instant gratification' mentality is disgusting and against the spirit of the game. What i find disgusting is paying for a game that demands me to be lifeless in order to invest in it several hours a day in order to earn any meaningful reward. PvP agents are not about instant reward. They are about getting fun with EVE in the only niche of time you have for it after a hard day's work and don't have that fun spoiled by a jobless punk with way too much time. So... no affordable NEx store... no full-fledged Incarna... no new casual content... no new solo content... no new PvE content...-á Why should I keep paying to play this game?
Shin Dari The Vendunari Warped Aggression 25	Posted - 2011.11.19 13:26:00 - [46] - Quote More Casual gameplay? Yes please.
Large Collidable Object morons. 594	Posted - 2011.11.19 13:41:00 - [47] - Quote Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote: Large Collidable Object wrote: (...) This 'instant gratification' mentality is disgusting and against the spirit of the game. What i find disgusting is paying for a game that demands me to be lifeless in order to invest in it several hours a day in order to earn any meaningful reward. So - why do you still pay for it? And meaningful reward? In instanced frig-pvp matches? Lol... Quote: PvP agents are not about instant reward. They are about getting fun with EVE in the only niche of time you have for it after a hard day's work and don't have that fun spoiled by a jobless punk with way too much time. Reading comprehension ftw. Step one: Get into an active corp - highsec and decshielded if you insist. Step two: Type the line: 'Anyone up for a frig 1o1?' in corp chat. Step three: Fleet up Step four: Meet at safespot, shoot away... Now how hard is that? morons- sting like a butterfly and-ápost like a bee.
Alara IonStorm RvB - BLUE Republic 440	Posted - 2011.11.19 16:09:00 - [48] - Quote Large Collidable Object wrote: MNagy wrote: The mission would give you a "keycard" for your jumpgate. (explained below). [...] Since the Jumpgate requires your keycard, nobody else can come and remote rep or anything. [...] When in this special pvp room that you can only get to with the gate, fleet bonus's do not work He didn't say the word 'instance', yet that's pretty much the closest thing to an instanced pvp arena imaginable. No it is not because that is not Instancing it is access restriction. It is surprising that so many EVE players view that as Instancing. Quote: It shouldn't provide any payout - LP or isk or standing-wise - that's just too much special treatment. Which leaves the question why they don't hook up with some corpmates and drop some cans, organise corp tournaments etc... This 'instant gratification' mentality is disgusting and against the spirit of the game. Why even have rewards at all, Murder is it's own reward. As for organizing Corps and dropping cans I am gonna just go a head and give the answer you don't want. Because I just plain don't want too. That would be boring as Balls. Not helped that it is ineffective because casuals won't join so 90% of your fights / variety are gone. Dropping a can gets you aggressed to one guy and a War Dec takes a week commitment where you have to be part of a Corp. All what is unnecessary complication. I would prefer to just log on an shoot some days with a bunch random strangers. Instead of Fleeting up going to the staging area and going 30 jumps to find very little. When I only have 20 Minutes to log in I want more then a Lvl 4 basically.
Lexmana Imperial Stout 59	Posted - 2011.11.19 16:38:00 - [49] - Quote Alara IonStorm wrote: No it is not because that is not Instancing it is access restriction. It is surprising that so many EVE players view that as Instancing. And what makes it different from an instance in any meaningful way?
MeestaPenni Mercantile and Stuff 76	Posted - 2011.11.19 16:46:00 - [50] - Quote Large Collidable Object wrote: Step two: Type the line: 'Anyone up for a frig 1o1?' in corp chat (you can copy&paste it from here too if that's too much effort). That would be like kissing your sister. It totally lacks the adrenaline rush of pew pew with a complete stranger.

Alara IonStorm RvB - BLUE Republic 441	Posted - 2011.11.19 16:50:00 - [51] - Quote Lexmana wrote: And what makes it different from an instance in any meaningful way? Because it is literally not Instancing, it has zero to do with instancing. If you are going to say something is Instanced it helps to know the definition of the word.
MNagy Yo-Mama Quixotic Hegemony 33	Posted - 2011.11.19 18:08:00 - [52] - Quote I have read the prior reply's and there seems to be an emerging arguement to "instancing". Ok, whether it be a restricted site like the final pocket in Angel Extravaganza, or an instance like a wh.... Lets ignore the "programming aspect" of this idea. Thats up to ccp to decide. A couple questions came up during the last 3 pages and I would like to give my reasons for them... Question 1: Why not have a pvp mission agent for all levels...why just level 4's? Answer: My reasoning for this, is so you don't get someone like me going up to level 1 agents and getting a pvp mission and whopping the butt of a brand new eve player. Once you have attained level 4's with an agent, you are no longer 'gullable' in the game and your skills in the tiny ships do seem to hold up towards older players. Question 2: Why not join Red Vs Blue or another corp and go hunting? Answer: I like my corp, we are a corp of really good friends. I do not want to give taxes to some other corp, and I don't need any more drama from 12 year old telling me what I can and can't do in a corp. Our corp was formed to get away from stuff like that, our corp keeps our assets safe... so I simply will not join another corp for that reason. Question 3: Why not just pvp against someone in your corp of in your alliance? Answer: Because when you do not know your targets 'toon age', or the ship they are bringing ( just the class of ship ), and you do not know their skillset ( if they are really good at jamming or rockets or neuting you )... there defenitly is an exciting "im gonna get my butt whooped or im gonna win" factor that plays. Question 4: Why not fix faction warefare? Answer: To be honest, I don't know much about faction warefare, it wasn't explained 'that great' during the tutorial missions I did about 2 years ago and I really haven't touched them since. I don't know what these do to your faction standing. But again, this is a battle that takes place when 1 person usually is not ready for pvp and the other is im assuming. Someone gets 'jumped' by the apposing team. Question 5: You should move this discussion to a different Forum. Answer: I want a general discussion about this idea about whats wrong with it, whats right with it, and if its feasable... if you want to go make 12 other posts in a different forum go ahead. I chose this one, and I don't have the time to follow 20 forums. One other point I would like to make about introducing some kind of pvp to HS, is that even though the ships are "small", stuff is getting blown up. So some prices will rise because of it. I'm sure plenty of people would suddenly make up pvp fits and try to sell them on the market as well. Anyway... thank you all (so far) for adding very interesting comments and at least keeping the discussion cival. I have read them all - and even the links. One thing that amazed me was how a very simillar idea was posted November 2nd... how some of us are starting to think of "the same thing" eve might "need" ("need" is a bad word for this sentance) to make the game more enjoyable for others. Don't forget, I am not trying to 'ruin' or break eve or make your gameplay worse. I am trying to come up with introducing a new type of play into eve that 51% or more of the population would enjoy. Cheers'
Alara IonStorm RvB - BLUE Republic 441	Posted - 2011.11.19 18:32:00 - [53] - Quote MNagy wrote: I have read the prior reply's and there seems to be an emerging arguement to "instancing". Ok, whether it be a restricted site like the final pocket in Angel Extravaganza, or an instance like a wh.... Lets ignore the "programming aspect" of this idea. Thats up to ccp to decide. Wormholes are not Instanced. I am just gonna go ahead and explain what Instancing is. A Instance is when you have an area of the game in which multiple copies are made of that area so that people can run the same content at the same time without interaction. An example of what would be considered an Instance if one was added to EVE Online. You remember the Yulai Station that was destroyed by combined Thukker Tribe Minmatar Fleet that sparked the Elder War between the Amarr and Minmatar Empires. This is an event that happened in Space a while ago. Now imagine if you created a new Character and warped to the Station, surrounding it is 3 older Characters who are looking at the burning ruins of the Station. You can see them, they can see you. Yet when you look at the Station it looks undamaged. That is an object Instanced in the world for story purposes. As for using it in content imagine CCP creates a special Mission, possibly one off or repeatable in which you or maybe a set number in a group warp to the station and there is a fleet of Republic Ships fighting the Station and it's Concord defenders. No one at the station can see you or the enemy fleet and you can't see them despite both being on the same grid as the station. You destroy the various Mobs of Rifters and Tempests around the Station and a Naglafar Dreadnaught Boss Spawns. You defeat it and are hailed as one of the hero's who tried to defend the station by Concord perhaps getting an achievement or medal of some sort. From now on the Station looks destroyed to you but a new player will see the Station as brand new. That is what Instancing is, players seeing different things despite being in the same spot. Not locked acceleration gates, that is just not Instancing.
Dbars Grinding Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation 46	Posted - 2011.11.19 21:38:00 - [54] - Quote PvP is too much work and a pain in the ass. I would love a instant form up pvp.
Alticus C Bear University of Caille Gallente Federation 13	Posted - 2011.11.19 21:58:00 - [55] - Quote I donGÇÖt object to the idea, I donGÇÖt feel the argument that this would take away from another part of Eve gameplay or impact development time on other items is really valid. However the proposal certainly perhaps needs a lot of thought in regards to balancing and rewards and I do not really like the idea of acceleration gates requiring keys although I realise that opens this up to cheating but that is eve. Also given that you would be recovering modules from the opposing ships wreck then mission rewards would need to be virtually nill. I also think I would prefer opposing mission objectives with aggression granted to destroy the opponent if needed, I just feel this sits better from a role-play perspective and makes it different from normal PVP. If the gates are not locked then Mission NPCGÇÖs could also help give third party intruders a hard time.
Fist1 Hostile Alcoholic Commanders 0	Posted - 2011.11.19 22:12:00 - [56] - Quote Vincent Athena wrote: Ive always thought there should be more ways to get pvp in whats supposed to be a pvp game. This sort of battle arena would be one way. Also,video of the combat site could be broadcast , and people could be given the opportunity to watch to bet on the outcome of battles. Might even be worthwhile Incarna content for establishments; you go to a bar, sit with friends or enemies, and bet on the fights. I actually like this idea the best. Have a NPC broker for taking bets and make 1v1 fighting a profession in eve. Possibly have the NPC's hold a once a month tourny between major factions. payout for only the top 3 finishers once a month.
Lexmana Imperial Stout 59	Posted - 2011.11.19 22:47:00 - [57] - Quote Alara IonStorm wrote: Lexmana wrote: And what makes it different from an instance in any meaningful way? Because it is literally not Instancing, it has zero to do with instancing. If you are going to say something is Instanced it helps to know the definition of the word. Do you know the meaning of the word 'meaningful'?
Alara IonStorm RvB - BLUE Republic 449	Posted - 2011.11.19 23:28:00 - [58] - Quote Lexmana wrote: Alara IonStorm wrote: Lexmana wrote: And what makes it different from an instance in any meaningful way? Because it is literally not Instancing, it has zero to do with instancing. If you are going to say something is Instanced it helps to know the definition of the word. Do you know the meaning of the word 'meaningful'? I know it means less to me then fun. So you can still get your "meaningful" with these missions and I will get my fun. Win win.
Large Collidable Object morons. 595	Posted - 2011.11.19 23:30:00 - [59] - Quote MNagy wrote: Question 1: Why not have a pvp mission agent for all levels...why just level 4's? Answer: My reasoning for this, is so you don't get someone like me going up to level 1 agents and getting a pvp mission and whopping the butt of a brand new eve player. Once you have attained level 4's with an agent, you are no longer 'gullable' in the game and your skills in the tiny ships do seem to hold up towards older players. Usually they don't. I've come accross shocking lack of knowledge about anything tracking/speed/pvp related from all maxed out Golem/whatver missionboat pilots in the past - they've lfown a frigate for exactly as long as they needed to, which nowadays is what? A day? Alara IonStorm wrote: text. What you're referring to is parallel instancing. Eve is heavily instanced already - any solar system or even grid is an instance. Anyway - that's nitpicking, but as Lexmana put it: If you're in a 'special room' nobody can meaningfully interact with any of the players inside except chat, there's no meaningful difference to a parallel instance. Concerning the 'kissing you own sister'/ 'knowing the other guys skillset and ships' argument: I've been in small, tight-knit corps and huge alliances. In the first case, I'd trust my mates to not check what ship I'm in, neither would I tell them - kinda defeats the purpose. In the former case, I wouldn't know 99% of the people anyway (and still trust them not to cheat in a fun frig 1 on 1). morons- sting like a butterfly and-ápost like a bee.
FeralShadow Black Storm Cartel 19	Posted - 2011.11.20 01:07:00 - [60] - Quote yeah so all this thinking about "that's what makes Eve what it is" is pretty much crap. Eve is what the players make it, and this "instanced" PVP scenario won't hurt or really affect anything in eve other than bringing PVP knowledge to those who normally wouldn't even bother. I fail to see how "that isn't eve" justifies preventing people from pvp experience which could only improve everybody's gameplay.



Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.